Skin hooks are regularly used by surgeons and other allied health care professionals for pulling back and/or holding the skin along an incision during a surgical procedure. Conventional skin hooks are unguarded, that is to say, they have surgical prongs that are exposed or uncovered at all times. The only covers provided for such conventional skin hooks are "one-use" covers, such as frangible plastic sheaths, that are torn or otherwise removed from the skin hooks before their initial introduction to the doctor for usage during a routine surgical procedure.
During routine surgical procedures, the operating room assistant (which may be a nurse, another doctor or any other individual) has to "slap" the unguarded skin hook into the surgeon's hand. This must be done so that the surgeon can "feel" the skin hook's orientation and automatically grip the handle of the unguarded skin hook without taking his or her eyes off of the patient. Unfortunately, in doing so, the assistant is left highly exposed to the uncovered prongs of conventional skin hooks. Such exposure can, and often does, result in the nurse or assistant being pricked or otherwise cut by the prongs.
A surgeon is similarly unable to take his or her eyes off of the patient when handing the skin hook back to the nurse or other assistant. Thus, the surgeon is often unable to properly orient the uncovered prongs thereof. Once again, the assistant is often required to take a conventional unguarded skin hook from the doctor by gripping either the exposed surgical prongs thereof or a part of the skin hook that is in close proximity to the exposed prongs. As a result, the nurse or assistant is often pricked and or otherwise cut by the exposed prongs.
In both of the above cases, as well as when a conventional skin hook is left unattended in the surgical field, it is not uncommon for the surgeon's assistant, and sometimes even the surgeon, to be stuck by the exposed prongs of conventional unguarded skin hooks. Such cuts, in addition to being extremely uncomfortable, can lead to the spreading of infection and disease. Concern over this situation has become especially acute since the appearance of the HIV virus. Indeed, such punctures have already been blamed, by some health care providers, for cases of HIV infection leading to the deadly AIDS disease. Consequently, some health care providers have gone so far as to stop performing surgical operations altogether, rather than risk the chances of inadvertently contracting the deadly HIV virus from an infected patient.
Similar concerns are presented relative to the Hepatitis B virus (also referred to herein as "HBV").
The risks associated with a puncture from conventional unguarded skin hooks during an operating room procedure are greater than those associated with needle sticks; but even there, the problem is becoming alarming. In a study made by the Needle Stick Surveillance Group of the C.D.C. (Centers for Disease Control) out of 3,978 known punctures from patients known to be HIV positive, 13 health care workers got infected, or roughly 1 out of 300. Thus, from a single needle stick while treating an AIDS patient in an operating room or other environment, the chances are roughly 1 out of 300 that the surgeon, nurse or other individual health care provider will sero-convert and become HIV positive.
If a surgeon, nurse or assistant is stuck by a skin hook while conducting a surgical procedure in an operating room (rather than a needle stick) the risk is much greater. This is simply because, first, there is more blood involved in a surgical procedure and, secondly, the surface area of the wound is larger. In operating on an HIV positive patient, and even if the chances of becoming HIV positive from a puncture sustained from a skin hook are substantially the same as the needle sticks--roughly 1 out of 300--if the surgeon or nurse performs just one operating room procedure on an HIV-positive patient per day for 6 days a week, 50 weeks per year, then the chances of becoming HIV positive through an inadvertent puncture in an operating room procedure are virtually guaranteed.
This situation has become so pronounced that some leading surgeons, as well as nurses and other individual health care providers, have abandoned their respective practices.
While the use of protective gloves aid in reducing the chances of being cut during a surgical operation, the use of such gloves are by no means foolproof, and such cuts are still quite common. Even when two sets of gloves are utilized, full protection is not afforded to the health care provider, for many times the razor-sharp surgical prongs of the skin hook cut right through both sets of gloves. Also, utilizing two sets of gloves at the same time reduces the wearers finger dexterity, thereby presenting problems with performing the intended surgical procedure and tending to reduce the effectivity thereof.
To the best of our knowledge, there are no surgical skin hooks which are fitted or otherwise equipped with a protective guard or cover which may be movable relative to one another so as to be used to selectively guard or cover the surgical prongs of a skin hook during a surgical procedure in order to protect against inadvertent contact therewith which may result in cuts or punctures.
It is noted that, to be readily adaptable for use during a standard surgical procedure in a standard operating theater, it is preferred that a skin hook having a guard therefor have any and/or all of the following features:
(1) adaptability that permits the protective guard to be retracted from, and replaced in position over, the surgical prongs of the skin hook with the use of only one hand; PA1 (2) means that permits the doctor (or other user of the skin hook) to be able to readily and tactily identify the mechanism or element which permits (releases and/or locks) the protective guard and the skin hook to be moved relative to one another, so that these elements can be placed in the selected position desired without the user thereof having to remove his or her eyes from the patient in order to visually observe the skin hook; PA1 (3) the shape of the protective guard should substantially approximate the shape of the body of the skin hook by which the guard is carried, so that during use thereof, the user may utilize a grip that substantially approximates the grip that is normally utilized, thereby providing the user with a good and comfortable "feel" when performing the surgical operating procedure, and further so that rotation of the skin guard relative to the protective hook is prevented; and PA1 (4) the skin hook should provide an auditory sound means, whereby the user may be made aware that the protective guard and the skin hook have actually been locked into their selected positions relative to one another without the necessity of having to remove his or her eyes from the patient in order to visually observe the instrument.
Thus, it can be seen that there further remains a need for a surgical skin hook that has a protective guard which is readily adaptable for use during a standard surgical procedure in an operating theater by providing the skin hook with any and/or all of the aforementioned elements.